2017-227-Minutes for Meeting July 30,1987 Recorded 5/9/2017Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2017-227
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk
Commissioners' Journal 05/09/2017 1:33:54 PM
For Recording Stamp Only
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
Bend, Oregon
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Audio Cassette Recording Titled: PUBLIC HEARING
July 30, 1987; 6:00-8:00 PM.
A meeting of the Board of County Commissioners was held on July 30, 1987.
Commissioners present were Lois Prante, Dick Maudlin and Tom Throop. Also
present were Rick (sham, County Counsel; County Administrator Mike Maier; and
other staff, citizens and media.
The purpose of the hearing was to hear an appeal of the Hearings Officer's
decision regarding an application for a minor alternation of a site plan, for a
modification to a previously approved site plan for a condominium building in The
Pines in Sunriver, in an RM, multiple family residential zoned district.
Ms. Prante gave the opening statement at this time, detailing how the hearing
would be conducted.
Regarding pre -hearing contacts, prejudice or bias, or personal interest, this would
be disclosed. The Commissioners disclosed none, and no challenges from the
audience were presented.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 1 of 7
Paul Blikstad of Planning gave the staff report and details of the application. The
site plan was approved by the Hearings Officer, with conditions, which he then
read. Among other things, any transfer of an easement would be conditioned on
allowing for a fire lane for adequate access for emergency vehicles.
The appeal focuses on the required 16 parking spaces, and an easement
agreement between the adjacent parties was to be the main access to the new
building, Building "G".
At this time, the Board and staff referenced plans and a map.
Bob Ringendern? of Vacation Internationale explained that the Kitty Hawk
development was to happen in phases. Each reserved an easement across the
balance of the undeveloped property. They are identified as the original
easements on the map. After VI purchased the property, they replanned all the
undeveloped property. As a part of that master planning, determined they
wanted buildings in the location of the original easement, so came up with an
easement located norther of the original. At the same time, they also wanted to
address another issue of the property to the west of the old ice rink being
landlocked. In working with Babler Brothers, easements were granted to satisfy
both properties. This was part of the negotiations.
Mr. Ringendern went on to explain the details of the agreement and how the
easements were decided. They are all recorded.
There was further, lengthy discussion from others about the nature and intent of
the easements. One originally was for secondary access for emergency services
only.
VI and the restaurant are on one side of the issue, and the owners of Kitty Hawk
are on the other.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987
Page 2 of 7
Lynn Vanaski? of Eugene testified. She is a partial owner in the Kitty Hawk
complex. She and her husband have been very involved in the evolution of Kitty
Hawk and VI, which was most of the time compatible. She feels that the plan as
presented by VI and Sunriver will have an adverse impact on Kitty Hawk and The
Pines. (She went on at great length to explain who the Kitty Hawk owners are and
how she understands the plans as presented.)
Mr. Throop asked for clarification of the access points and what the Kitty Hawk
owners had already agreed to. The parking areas were explained.
Dan Kerns of Tyler Road said his company works in Sunriver. He went into detail
about how the Kitty Hawk project started and the early approvals. At one point,
his company relinquished its rights to complete the project to VI, in 1980. They
retained one of the units. The original easement did not meet VI's needs, so the
easement was modified. The property owners did not want the southerly access.
VI said they would amend the easement to allow for secondary access.
(There was a long discussion about the various easements.) They would like to
have some of the easement back so they don't have to look at a parking lot from
their units. As it stands, they may even lose a bike path. They'd like to see the
additional parking spaces located elsewhere, to the north. They would also like
some input as to landscaping, and see that the trees are retained.
Sunriver Properties is now very involved and want the easement to connect the
properties between the restaurant and the Great Hall. VI will do this, so they
already have made the deal. But the Kitty Hawk owners are paying for it. He also
feels that consolidating the parking will make traffic issues worse. (His testimony
went on at length.)
Ken Grunes? testified that he has owned a Kitty Hawk unit for six years, and has
observed the degradation of the surrounding areas. He has been unable to find a
parking space when he visits his unit. He has had to avoid bicyclists and cars a lot
more than before. This detracts from the tranquility of the area to have that
amount of traffic through the area. He would rather awaken to the sounds of
birds instead of cars and traffic.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 3 of 7
Steven ? of Sunriver said he is the current manager for the Kitty Hawk HOA. He
feels there is a responsibility for him to follow the direction of the HOA board.
Some of this deals with the VI proposal. He got a lot of letters and phone calls
when the site plan changes were proposed. Most of the comments were negative
and the people wondered what Kitty Hawk could do to change what was
happening.
Mr. Throop said the Sunriver management indicated they would not attend the
hearing, since they did not want to enter the "battle". A letter came from the
Chief of the Sunriver Fire Department indicating he believes there is still a need
for a northerly access.
Bob Ringendern said he is an officer and director of Vacation Internationale. He
reviewed the history and involvement with the property. He explained why the
proposed access is where it is, for safety, emergency and site line reasons. He
said they also acquired commercial land near the ice rink so it could be used for a
restaurant, prior to the idea of converting the ice rink.
The original easement was approved by the Kitty Hawk board, and included the
north access. There was a discussion on whether the board had the legal right to
vacate the other common easement. It was determined that they probably did
not have this right, so all of the Kitty Hawk owners were contacted and provided
the easement paperwork, which all approved.
In conjunction with this effort, Dan Kern raised the issue regarding access to the
south to the existing ice rink property and the potential restaurant site, and
agreed to his insertion of an amended easement. (He went on to explain the
details of the transactions and the parking situation.)
He feels that the County's requirement of two parking spaces per unit is not
reasonable for transient, vacation type use. It is not the equivalent of a
permanently occupied unit where there may be two working people or drivers in
the family unit. In the contrary, they have people arriving for a one-week
vacation and usually they have just one vehicle.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 4 of 7
The formula always used by the County for one parking stall for each studio or
one bedroom unit, and one and one-half for the two bedroom units is more
appropriate when planning for parking. They already exceed that amount of
parking on the site.
The Kitty Hawk development is one parking stall short of providing what the
County requires. If they would align their existing areas and add a small amount
of asphalt, they could have an additional six parking stalls. Ms. Prante pointed
out that this is not an issue being addressed today. Mr. Ringendern said he noted
this fact because someone testified there is not enough existing parking in the
area.
There was then a discussion about the agreements made between Sunriver and
The Pines.
Regarding the bike path, it would be part of the parking lot or moved adjacent to
it. He feels the bike path would start off the end of the parking lot. They would
relocate it as necessary. He feels the need for the parking area would allow the
landlocked property to be freed up, and the Fire Department wants the additional
fire access.
VI would only want to build the parking that they are required to have, and no
more. Ms. Prante said they would have to do what is required in the latest
ordinance.
Gary Feebie? of Sunriver Properties Oregon said he has been there for 14 years.
There have been many changes on the Kitty Hawk property since its original
inception. Some have been good in the long run. He provided some history of
the project, which has been bought and sold many times and sat in limbo part of
that time. He talked about adjacent property that they hope to develop at some
point in the commercial area.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 5 of 7
Things have changed. VI asked to have their property changed from commercial
to residential. This might change the mix of the traffic and people coming into the
site, but residential impacts are smaller overall. The Kitty Hawk lack of parking is
part of the overall problem. If exclusive parking rights are developed, this will
negatively impact the Kitty Hawk residents.
VI taking over the property is a positive. It would be a lot more crowded with a
lot more traffic if it had been developed as commercial. The change of the use of
the parcel and the easement will be helpful overall.
He encouraged the Board to visit the site to see what is there and might be there
under other circumstances.
Dan Young of Sunriver Properties testified that he wanted to clarify a couple of
issues. Sunriver Properties is very interested in the north easement situation,
contrary to what someone said. They recognize the validity of the recorded
easement and will make their plans accordingly around this. They do not want
conflicts between the commercial traffic and the residential traffic.
He does not see how life in the area would be degraded by this. People in Kitty
Hawk have had the benefit of largely undeveloped property around them and
now don't want to see anything else put there. VI is following through with a plan
that is much less ambitious than the original Kitty Hawk plan. The entire
property, not just theirs, has been planned for development.
The new use is much more appropriate, and access should be separated from the
commercial access.
Being no further testimony offered, the Commissioners decided on a site visit to
the area, and continued the hearing for a couple of weeks to gather more
information.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 6 of 7
I certify that the above is a true and accurate record of a meeting, as reproduced from a
cassette tape identified as Minutes of a Public Hearing of the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners, held on July 30, 1987. This record was completed subsequent to the presiding
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners' tenure.
r
Bonnie Baker
For the Board of County Commissioners
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Public Hearing, July 30, 1987 Page 7 of 7